[multipathtcp] is it necessary to calculate tot_cwnd in coupled congestion control algorithm ?
Ming Li <limingbupt@gmail.com> Thu, 12 April 2012 06:20 UTC
Return-Path: <limingbupt@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7422611E8075 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:20:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6B7W5jYs4Bhm for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-f172.google.com (mail-lb0-f172.google.com [209.85.217.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B7121F84A6 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbok13 with SMTP id k13so1413093lbo.31 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :content-type; bh=jLeI4WmRX8VVc7bJgJcKfbj8YrbcPg+Wabz6fmw2AyI=; b=mRb8U1X0OZxAYL40v+JWibUN3WszwfNJkOUj8t3kDRbenelX0eU+xDul0YneaibKRK 7x/XpC/8a+9251XteeejvZnqboTSc0W/03kvWrNhKOaatVje7+nNoKp7AHQC3Rj7p7fY lFDAef4UmDRxE3jpWGkGUL0TWLUfuPQ9NfJ3+F6cEu45pyydR/xL8ph6gJzbyDkoCYQa WZLix4wWqLhQ7SzB3/ApTtirFiglFQVvm5FL0M+0dbw4zHdSe9alCe3/ZpDspzDnsNnW CqzXuwcKYG1CAqGwYJvUhGuouir+oGA6hFB6O9MABm1rCdvHGeyScj6Z2DxH0zeBNQG7 5e1Q==
Received: by 10.152.125.41 with SMTP id mn9mr1008526lab.30.1334211617799; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:20:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (a88-114-28-188.elisa-laajakaista.fi. [88.114.28.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id oi3sm3974273lab.12.2012.04.11.23.20.16 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 23:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4F86741F.5080504@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:20:15 +0300
From: Ming Li <limingbupt@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: multipathtcp@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080805020903060201020505"
Subject: [multipathtcp] is it necessary to calculate tot_cwnd in coupled congestion control algorithm ?
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/multipathtcp>
List-Post: <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 06:20:23 -0000
Hei, According to the formulas (1) and (2) given by " draft-ietf-mptcp-congestion-07 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mptcp-congestion-07.txt>", when we put (2) into (1), the value of tot_cwnd is on both of the element and the denominator and element. Thus, we do not necessarily to calculate the tot_cwnd because it can be removed on the element and denominator. But the paper seems spend some effort to explain how to get the toto_cwnd value in kernel. I do not know why ? Could someone give some comments ? Thank you very much! Br, Ming